alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 24-1052

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Ortez Jones

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

 ____________

 Submitted: July 29, 2024

Filed: August 1, 2024

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Ortez Jones appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded

guilty to a firearm offense pursuant to a written plea agreement containing an appeal

1The Honorable Matthew T. Schelp, United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri.
waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, applicable,

and enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010)

(reviewing de novo the validity and applicability of an appeal waiver). The record

reflects that Jones entered into the plea agreement and appeal waiver knowingly and

voluntarily, and enforcing the waiver will not result in a miscarriage of justice. See

United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (discussing

the enforceability of appeal waivers). Further, we have independently reviewed the

record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988). We note that, subsequent to

briefing in this case, the United States Supreme Court decided Erlinger v. United

States, 144 S. Ct. 1840 (2024), holding that a jury must determine if offenses were

committed on separate occasions for purposes of an enhancement under the Armed

Career Criminal Act (ACCA). However, Jones waived any argument under Erlinger

when he withdrew his objection to the ACCA enhancement based on United States

v. Stowell, 82 F.4th 607 (8th Cir. 2023). See United States v. Washington, 727 Fed.

Appx. 779, 780 (4th Cir. 2018) (unpublished per curiam) (finding defendant waived

any argument on whether his prior convictions were properly counted as separate

offenses for purposes of ACCA enhancement, as he withdrew his objection to the

issue at sentencing); United States v. Rodriguez, 311 F.3d 435, 436-37 (1st Cir. 2002)

(finding that defendant waived his objection to the predicate offenses supporting his

career offender status by withdrawing the objection at sentencing). Otherwise, we

find no non-frivolous issues for appeal falling outside the scope of the appeal waiver. 

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal based on the appeal waiver, and we grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
# C_2022148EN.01002101.xml

| 4.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — GEA Group v Commission

(Case T-195/19) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European markets in tin stabilisers and in ESBO/esters heat stabilisers - Decision establishing an infringement of Article 81 EC - Decision amending the initial decision annulled - Decision rejecting a request for repayment of the fine - Action for annulment - Actionable measure - Interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Article 266(1) TFEU)

(2022/C 148/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: GEA Group AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: I. du Mont, R. van der Hout and C. Wagner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi, V. Bottka and T. Baumé, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision Ares(2019) 283284 final of 24 January 2019 dismissing the request of the applicant seeking repayment of the fine paid under Commission Decision C(2009) 8682 final of 11 November 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.589 — Heat stabilisers).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders GEA Group AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders GEA Group AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4566-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Delaware (FEMA-4566-DR), dated October 2, 2020, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This change occurred on June 1, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Mark K. O'Hanlon, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Timothy S. Pheil, as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2021-15629 Filed 7-21-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
# C_2020114EN.01000901.xml

| 6.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/9

---

Order of the General Court of 5 February 2020 — Apple v EUIPO (Stylets)

(Case T-212/19) (1)

(Community design - Division of the application for registration remedying the irregularity which had led to the refusal of registration - No need to adjudicate)

(2020/C 114/07)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Apple Inc. (Cupertino, California, United States) (represented by: H. Hartwig and A. von Mühlendahl, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne and D. Botis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 January 2019 (Case R 2533/2017-3), relating to an application for registration of a Community design representing a stylus.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action;

| 2. | Apple Inc. shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Apple Inc. shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.

---
#### Albany Medical College, Respondent, v Richard H. McShane, Appellant.

—Casey, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Cholakis, J.), entered April 2, 1985 in Albany County, which denied defendant’s motion for a protective order and granted plaintiffs cross motion for an order directing defendant to produce documents enumerated in plaintiffs notice to take a deposition upon oral examination.

Plaintiff commenced this action seeking to recover, among other things, office equipment, patient records, and fees and revenues from patient care allegedly diverted by defendant during his employment as a teacher, researcher and supervisor. Following this court’s reversal of Special Term’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (104 AD2d 119, *affd*67 NY2d 757), plaintiff served a notice to take deposition containing a request that defendant produce a number of specified documents to be used at the oral examination. Defendant moved for a protective order with respect to that part of the notice which sought production of documents, alleging that the notice was premature, overbroad, vague and intended to harass defendant, and that the requested documents related to a period that was irrelevant to the action. Plaintiff cross-moved for an order compelling defendant to comply with the notice. Special Term denied defendant’s motion and granted plaintiffs cross motion. This appeal ensued.

This court has recently stated that: "The trial court is vested with broad discretion in supervising disclosure * * * This discretion must be exercised in light of the court’s broader duty to facilitate the resolution of civil actions * * * and based upon the well-settled principle that the disclosure provisions of the CPLR are to be interpreted liberally, with the test being one of usefulness and reason” *(Sarbro Realty Corp. v Kradjian,*116 AD2d 866, 867).

*884Having reviewed the record, we find no abuse of discretion by Special Term and, therefore, its order must be affirmed.

Order affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.
#### Kaimel GLENN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CMS MEDICAL TEAM, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 11-6183.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 28, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 1, 2011.

Kaimel Glenn, Appellant Pro Se.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kaimel Glenn seeks to appeal the district court’s order administratively closing his case until it can be placed on the active docket. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528*142(1949). The order Glenn seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. *See Penn-America Ins. Co. v. Mapp,*521 F.3d 290, 295-96 (4th Cir.2008) (noting that an otherwise non-final order does not become final because the district court administratively closes the case). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
# C_2020215EN.01003502.xml

| 29.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — View. v EUIPO (CREATE DELIGHTFUL HUMAN ENVIRONMENTS)

(Case T-49/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark CREATE DELIGHTFUL HUMAN ENVIRONMENTS - Trade mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 215/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: View, Inc. (Milpitas, Delaware, United States) (represented by: G. Tritton, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2018 (Case R 1625/2018-2), concerning the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark CREATE DELIGHTFUL HUMAN ENVIRONMENTS.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders View, Inc. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders View, Inc. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.

---
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**716 CA 13-01526**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ.

STEVEN HERBERT, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V ORDER

EASTERN WAREHOUSE, INC. AND JOHN CARROLL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PRESIDENT OF EASTERN WAREHOUSE, INC., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

GOLDBERG SEGALLA LLP, BUFFALO (KATHLEEN J. MARTIN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
MICHAEL D. CALARCO, NEWARK (JESSICA L. BRYANT OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Wayne County (John B. Nesbitt, A.J.), entered November 28, 2012. The order, among other things, denied the motion of defendants to dismiss the complaint.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court.

Entered: June 13, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
# C_2019357EN.01004402.xml

| 21.10.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 357/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.10.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 357/44

---

Order of the General Court of 23 August 2019 — Cantieri del Mediterraneo v Commission

(Case T-335/19) (1)

(2019/C 357/54)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.

---
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR R EHEARING

Appellate case name: In re Fort Bend Independent School District

Appellate case number: 01

- 18

- 01113

- CV

Trial court case number: 18

- DCV

- 251366

Trial court: 434th District Court of Fort Bend County

Date motion filed: November 1, 2019

Party filing motion: Real Party in Interest

It is ordered that the motion for rehearing is DENIED GRANTED.

In this Court’s October 3, 2019 opinion, we directed the trial court to vacate its July 26,

2019 order appointing the Guardian ad Litem and its August 6, 2019 order reappointing the Maste r

in Chancery and to issue an order dismissing the underlying proceeding. We are confident the trial

court will promptly comply. Accordingly, our writ of mandamus will issue only if the trial court

does not comply within thirty days of the date of this ord er.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Landau

Date: Decembe r 3 , 2019
# C_2020087EN.01000801.xml

| 16.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 87/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 87/8

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 11 December 2019 — Q-GmbH v Z Tax Office

(Case C-907/19)

(2020/C 87/11)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Q-GmbH

Defendant: Z Tax Office

Question referred

Does a service related to insurance and reinsurance transactions that is performed with exemption from tax by insurance brokers and insurance agents within the meaning of Article 135(1)(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) exist if a taxable person who carries out intermediary work for an insurance company also provides that insurance company with the mediated insurance product?

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

---
##### 



Exhibit 14.6 Independent Auditors Consent The Board of Directors
California Steel Industries, Inc.: We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form F-4 (Nos. 333-109610; 333-109610-01) and Form F-3 (Nos. 333-110867;
333-10867-01) of Companhia Vale do Rio Doce (CVRD) and Vale Overseas Limited
(Vale Overseas) of our report dated January 17, 2003, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheet (as restated) of California Steel Industries, Inc.
and subsidiary as of December 31, 2002 and the related consolidated statements
of operations, stockholders equity and cash flows for each of the years in the
two-year period ended December 31, 2002, which report appears in the Annual
Report on Form 20-F of CVRD and Vale Overseas for the year ended December 31,
2003. /s/ KPMG LLP  Costa Mesa, California
June 4, 2004
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT SEPT 06 , 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 15809 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 99 -000 10 -C R -1 U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s A N G E L G I O V A N N Y M E R C A D O , a .k .a . G io v a n n i A n g e l M e r c a d o - C e rv a n te s , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 6, 2006) B efo re T JO F L A T , A N D E R S O N an d B IR C H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: P u r s u a n t to a p le a a g r e e m e n t, ap p e lla n t p le d g u ilty o n A u g u s t 1 0 , 1 9 9 9 to2

conspi ra cyt o d i stri bu t e a nd po ss es s w i th the i nt entt o d i stri bu t e her oi n, coca i ne, and cocai ne base , i n v i ol at i on of 21 U . S . C . §§ 84 1(a) (1) a nd 84 6, and o n D ec em ber 1, 1999, the di s tr i c tc our ts e nt e nc e d hi m t o pr i s on f or180 m onths . H e i s now s e rvi ng tha ts e nt e nc e i n a f e de r a l pr i s on. O n J une 11, 2003, appe l l a ntm ove d the di s tr i c tc our tt o c om pe l the G ov ernm entt o st at e w hy i thad n otfi l ed a F ed. R . C ri m . P . 35 (b) m ot i on t o reduce hi s s ent ence for r enderi ng subst ant i al as si st ance . T he courtdeni ed the m ot i on i n an or de re nt e r e d on S e pt e m be r26, 2005. R e c or d, V ol 2, a t237. A ppe l l a ntnow appe a l s the c our t ’ s rul i ng. F o rth e r e a s o n s t a t e d i n th e d i s tr i c tc o u r t ’ s S e p t e m b e r2 6 , 2 0 0 5 o r d e r , we c o n c lu d e th a t th e c o u r t p r o p e r ly d e n ie d ap p e lla n t’s m o tio n . A F F I R M E D .
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-19057, 333-27977, and 333-136316) of our reports dated March 13, 2008 related to the consolidated financial statements and selected financial ratios and other data of Medallion Financial Corp.and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 and for each of the three years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2007 and on management’s assessment of effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December31, 2007 and our report dated March 13, 2008 related to the financial statements of Medallion Bank as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 and for the years then ended, which appear in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Medallion Financial Corp.for the year ended December 31, 2007. 

Weiser LLP 

NewYork, New York 

March 13, 2008
Exhibit
32.1





Certification Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Robert Stevanovski, the Principal
Executive Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of WorldGate
Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009, which this
certification accompanies, fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and
information contained in the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.





A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to WorldGate and will be
retained by WorldGate and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.





Dated:  May
      15, 2009
              /s/  Robert
      StevanovskiRobert
      StevanovskiInterim
      Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)